1995 09-12.~
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1995 - 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD AUGUST 8, 1995:
(APPROVED)
TABLED JULY 11, 1995: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST WITH A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 700,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL
PROJECT BY LANGLY AND ASSOCIATES: (APPROVED FINDINGS;
PASS ON RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL)
2. TABLED AUGUST 8, 1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
(TABLED UNTIL OCTOBER 10, 1995)
3. TABLED AUGUST 8, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION
NO.2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION: (TABLED UNTIL
OCTOBER 10, 1995)
4. TABLED AUGUST 8, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HIGHLANDS RANCH
SUBDIVISION BY GEM PARK II PARTNERSHIP: (TABLED UNTIL
OCTOBER 10, 1995)
5. TABLED AUGUST 8, 1995: CONDITIONAL USE PERM IT FOR HIGHLANDS
RANCH SUBDMSION BY GEM PARK II PARTNERSHIP: (TABLED UNTIL
OCTOBER 10, 1995)
6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT REQUEST FOR A QUICK LOBE SHOP BY JAY BURRUP:
(APPROVED FINDINGS; PASS ON RECOMMENDATION TO CITY
COUNCIL)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT REQUEST FOR A NAIL SALON BY GRETCHEN SHERWOOD:
(APPROVED FINDINGS; PASS ON RECOMMENDATION TO CITY
COUNCIL)
8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT REQUEST FOR A GROUP DAY CARE BY JUDY WILSON:
(APPROVED FINDINGS; PASS ON RECOMMENDATION TO CITY
COUNCIL)
9. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND
ZONING REQUEST FOR 2.3 ACRES TO R-40 BY BILLY QUINN:
(APPROVED FINDNGS; PASS ON RECOMMENDATION TO CITY
COUNCIL)
10. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND
ZONING REQUEST FOR 40.17 ACRES TO C-G AND l-O BY JIM
BALLANTYNE: (APPROVED FINDNIGS; PASS ON RECOMMENDATION
TO CITY COUNCIL)
11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VACATION OF A 20' EASEMENT IN
CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK NO. 1, LOT 5, BLOCK 1 BY JEFF
COFFER: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE
FROM 1800 TO 1500 SQUARE FEET FOR ENGLEWOOD SUBDIVISION
BY ENGLEWOOD CREEK DEVELOPMENT: (APPROVE REQUEST FOR
THE REDUCTION; APPROVE FINDNGS TO BE AMENDED BY CITY
COUNCIL)
13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
CELLULAR COMMUNICATION FACILITY BY US WEST NEWVECTOR
GROUP, INC.: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FULL
SERVICE RESTAURANT, LOUNGE AND MICRO-BREWERY BY
SANDPIPER RESTAURANTS: (CITY ATTORNEYTO PREPARE FINDINGS
OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR VALLEY
CENTER MARKET PLACE BY W.H. MOORE COMPANY. (TABLED
UNTIL OCTOBER 10, 1995)
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
AGENDA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1995 - 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD AUGUST 8, 1995: approved..,
1. TABLED JULY 11, 1995: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST WITH A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR AN APPROXIMATELY 700,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL
PROJECT BY LANGLY AND ASSOCIATES: li/iPrUVe ~~~ ~` c%
~atr f ecor+w~ndatibr~ t1U jhe ~/G~
2. TABLED AUGUST 8, 1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR
PACKARD SUBDMSION N0.2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
-/e u~..fil Oct: /~o!~ ~i~,
3. TABLED AUGUST 8, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD SUBDMSION
N0.2 BY PNElEDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
~~b% ~tcZ 4cf, /o ~ facf~,
4. TABLED AUGUST 8, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HIGHLANDS RANCH
SUBDIVISION BY GEM PARK II PARTNERSHIP:
~~z. uh-t: r Dc t, ~o,'~ /~.~ as rc~u ~.rfert' 6 y ~~~.Pi~ ~~t-
5. TABLED AUGUST 8, 1995: CONDITIONAL USE PERM IT FOR HIGHLANDS
RANCH SUBDMSION BY GEM PARK II PARTNERSHIP:
-~~e un~i7 Uet./o!z~n~rj of rz~aert~~/_ ~y ~/>/~%r%~~t
6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT REQUEST FOR A QUICK LOBE SHOP BY JAY BURRUP:
ap~6ovt' ~lfi~L'~~ pair e^n./:ecmmmeha'atra~,.-fo t?.e ele
7. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT REQ~EST FOR A NAIL SALON BY GRETCHEN SHERWOOD:
~P~r~~e~ ~~`elt f~er,~/ nr~ reco~mendat~vh. ~ 11~e ~/e,
8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT REQUEST FOR A GROUP DAY CARE BY JUDY WILSON:
appnv/e ~lF ~ C/c ,~,~f ors recorrm enda~tT~ ~m G~ G'/~
9. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND
ZONING REQ EST FOR 2.3 ACRES TO R-30 BY BILLY QUINN:
tc~,a~~e ~~f ~ e% /aa.rr ®n re~a~~rendatimia. ~v tke ~'f~
10. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND
ZONING REQUEST FOR 40.17 ACRES TO C-G AND L-0 BY JIM
BALLANTYNE
~`J,orov2 ~~~ ~~% parr oh ~co~rne~~trba~tv~e ~~L
11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VACATION OF A 20' EASEMENT IN
CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK NO. 1, LOT 5, BLOCK 1 BY JEFF
COFFER: P/f~
;~y azY~~ey ~ PrePa~~ ~~~ ~~~G
12. PUBLIC HERRING: REQUEST TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE
FROM 1800 TO 1500 SQUARE FEET FOR ENGLEWOOD SUBDIVISION
BY ENGLEWOOD CREEK DEVELOPMENT: D~~
~~1pMVZ YeQu«L fvr l)e.P /-eQach7rr- a~~Jro/?{lF#e~lf~hPe~ekctert,
13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FORlIAGG
CELLULAR COMM,UrICATION FACILITY BY US WEST NEWVECTOR
GROUP, INC.: ~/H re az.e CIF ~ ~'~~
C~i~tcf~~nef ~a~' P
14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A FULL
SERVICE f2~STAURANT, LOUNGE AN MICRO-BREWERY BY
SANDPIPER RESTAURANTS: /'~~
15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR VALLEY
CENTER MARKET PLACE BY W.H. MOORE COMPANY.
/~/~ /
G~F~ GL ~~~nGv ~a' ~JrQ~L'cz~l,2 ~~{ ,~~ C' Z
~ITY OF MERIDIAN
PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP S~EET
~ITY OF MERIDIAN
PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP S~EET
~~~ - z z
-~ Gu0.f ~G v~ SC=C` G~ G ~~ ~~~I F( S
f Il,+.t Ul~~,~~ (~~l z ~ r -ter aio
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 12. 1995
The regular meeting of the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order
by Chairman Jim Johnson at 7:30 P.M.:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Tim Hepper, Charlie Rountree, Moe Alidjani:
MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Shearer:
OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Linda and
Phillip Wicombe, Billie Jo Premoe, Helen Sharp, Dale Sharp, William Meyer, Tim
McFadden, Ron Smith, Jonathan Seel, Charlie Gongre, Mel Biserrif, Richard Jewell, Larry
Sale, Becky Bowcut, Landon Exely:
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 12, 1995:
Johnson: The first item on our agenda is to approve the minutes of the previous meeting
held. August 8, 1995. You have the minutes are there any corrections, additions or
deletions to these minutes? Entertain a motion for approval of these minutes as written.
Alidjani: I make a motion vre approve these minutes.
Rountree: Second
Kingsford: We have a motion and a second to approve the minutes as prepared, all those
in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #1: TABLED JULY 11, 1995: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
AN APPROXIMATELY 700,000 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL PROJECT BY LANGLY AND
ASSOCIATES:
Johnson: We had the public hearing, Wayne is it still open or is it closed?
Crookston: It was closed.
Johnson: We have the findings of fact that have been prepared on this: Is there any
discussion? What is your pleasure?
Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Meridian Planning and Zoning hereby adopts
and approves these findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Alidjani: Second
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 2
Johnson: It has been moved and seconded that we approve the findings of fact and
conclusions of law as written, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Shearer -Absent, Alidjani -Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Johnson: Any decision or recommendation you wish to pass on to the City Council?
Rountree: Mr. Chairman, 1 move that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of
Meridian hereby decides that the property set forth in the application should be approved
for annexation zoning (inaudible) set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions.
Hepper: Second
Johnson: A motion and a second to pass the recommendation as stated onto the City
Council, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #2: TABLED AUGUST 8, 1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR
PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
ITEM #3: TABLED AUGUST 8, 1995: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PACKARD
SUBDIVISION NO. 2 BY PNE/EDMONDS CONSTRUCTION:
Johnson: It is my understanding there is a neighborhood meeting scheduled with ACHD
for tomorrow. I think that information is necessary and pertinent to any decision and
recommendation we make to City Council.
Rountree: Mr. Chairman with respect to that information and the information we have for
items 4 and 5 I move that we table items 2, 3 4 and 5 until our next regularly scheduled
meeting which is October 10.
Hepper: Second
Johnson: We have a motion to table items 2, 3 4 and 5, we actually have a request for
items 4 and 5 from the developer, all in favor of that motion? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 3
ITEM #6: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A QUICK LUBE SHOP BY JAY BURRUP:
Johnson: Any comments or discussion regarding these findings of fact as prepared by the
City Attorney?
Alidjani Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby
adopt and approve these findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Rountree: Second
Johnson: Moved and seconded we approve the findings of fact as prepared by the City
Attorney, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Shearer -Absent, Alidjani -Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Johnson: Recommendation to the City Council?
Alidjani: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that the Meridian Planning and Zoning
Commission hereby recommends to the Meridian City Council that they approve the
conditional use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the
application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Rountree: Second
Johnson: Moved and seconded to pass a recommendation onto the City Council as read,
all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #7: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR A NAIL SALON BY GRETCHEN SHERWOOD:
Rountree: Mr. Chairman (inaudible) I would propose or make a motion that wB approve the
findings of facts and conclusions of law for items 7, 8, 9 and 10 as a consent approval.
Hepper: Second
Johnson: Any discussion? That is a motion and a second to blanket approve the findings
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 4
of fact for items 7, 8, 9 and 10. Does anyone have any objection to that since we have a
roll call vote. Does anyone wish to have an individual vote on any of those items? If not
then, we will have a roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Hepper -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Shearer -Absent, Alidjani -Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Johnson: Any recommendations on to the City?
Rountree: Mr. Chairman I move that we approve the recommendations and decisions as
written for items 7. 8 and 9 and 10.
Hepper: Second
Johnson: We have a motion and a second to pass a favorable recommendation on as
stated in the findings of fact to the City Council, does anyone wish to question any
individual item on that blanket motion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VACATION OF A 20' EASEMENT IN
CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK NO. 1 LOT 5, BLOCK 1 BY JEFF COFFER:
Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative
to address the Commission at this time.
Charlie Gongre, Roylance Engineering, 4619 Emerald, Boise, was sworn by the City
Attorney.
Gongre: We are requesting the relinquishment of a 20 foot easement on the west and
north side of Lot 5, Block 1 and replacing it with 5 foot easements. I am available to answer
any questions that you have.
Johnson: Thank you, I should point out to the Commission that we are receipt of a letter
dated September 11th from ACRD on this matter, does everyone have a copy of that? Any
questions for the applicant?
Rountree: Have you seen the comments from the City Engineer as welt as the comments
from ACHD?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 5
Gongre: I have not.
Johnson: I can make this available to you which is the ACRD letter. This letter was dated
the 7th, you don't have a copy of that?
Gongre: No sir I don't, eve probably do at our office, I don't normally handle this project.
Rountree: Both letters indicate that the current easement contains storm water drainage
system and the desire to be able to maintain that system. What is your position?
Gongre: The storm water drainage system that I am aware from having visit the site is an
open ditch that is next to the service road that is on the canals property. In which this case
this can be relocated rf it needs to be if the developer really feels like it is necessary to do
that. We can relocate that thing.
Johnson: Here is the letter for you from the City Engineer if you haven't had an opportunity
to read that. That is another copy you can have.
Gongre: In response to ACHD's letter, I would like to say we, that if we do find that the
actual location of the pipe is outside of the easement that we are proposing to do then we
understand that there is a cost to the developer to relocate any piping that is outside the
area that would remain as an easement.
Johnson: In effect you are saying that you would move it is that what you are saying?
Gongre: Yes I am.
Rountree: And with that moving there would be sufficient room in order to maintain the
pipe? They indicated that (inaudible) 20 foot easement would be necessary to maintain the
pipe.
Gongre: I honestly have not looked at the depth of that pipe at this point so I honestly
don't know the answer to that question.
Johnson: Any further questions? Thank you very much, this is a public hearing is there
anyone else from the public that would like to address the Commission on this application?
Would the Public Works Department or ACHD wish to comment?
Smith: Mr. Chairman, Commission members, we just event into the field to verify whether
or not that pipe was in existence and according to the design drawings it was to be there
and it is there. It is our opinion that easement needs to be maintained as is for the
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 6
maintenance of the pipe. It does drain a portion of the street from the I think there is a
catch basin at I am not sure the name of the street but it is the first street in from East 1st,
there is a point of catch right there and that pipe runs to the east and then to the north
along in this easement and then to the east continuing along the north side of this property
to Nine Mile Drain. So if the easement is to be vacated then the pipe needs to be
relocated in another easement I would assume. It is not our pipe, it belongs to, I guess it
is the Highway Districts storm drainage pipe. I am not certain of that but Larry could
speak to that.
Johnson: Thank you Mr. Smith. Larry Sate, anything to add.
Sale: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, for the record I am Larry Sale with
ACHD. The design plans for the storm drains indicate that is varies in depth from 8 feet
in the street to about 10 feet deep along the property line. Obviously anything can be
relocated if you spend enough money I guess. We would recommend that the applicant
search for another means to reach their goals other than to vacate the easement and
relocate the pipe. So we would reaffirm our recommendation that the easement not be
vacated. Certainly until the applicant provides the Highway District with an adequate plan
for suitable relocation.
Johnson: Thank you Mr. Sale. Would the applicant like to make any further comment
before we close the public hearing? At this time I will Gose the public hearing. Any further
questions or discussion?
Rountree: Do we have findings on this or do we make a decision?
Crookston: I believe we have to have findings.
Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that we have findings of fact and conclusions of law
prepared on this request for vacation of a 20 foot easement.
Hepper: Second
Johnson: It is moved and seconded that we have the City Attorney prepare findings of fact
and conclusions of law on this application, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM SQUARE
FOOTAGE FROM 1800 TO 1500 SQUARE FEET FOR ENGLEWOOD SUBDIVISION BY
ENGLEWOOD CREEK DEVELOPMENT:
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 7
Johnson: I will now open the public hearing and invite the applicant or his representative
to come forward and address the Commission. Is there anyone here representing the
applicant? It is a possibility Mr. Jewell is coming, he told our City Clerk that he might be
a little late. It would be my recommendation that we defer this to the end of our agenda.
ITEM #13: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
CELLULAR COMMUNICATION FACILITY BY US WEST NEWVECTOR GROUP, INC.:
Johnson: I will now open the public hearing, is the applicant or his representative ready
to address the Commission.
Timothy McFadden, 11201 Southeast 8th St, Bellevue, WA, 98004, was sworn by the City
Attorney.
McFadden: I am an acquisition and zoning consultant for US West, I am the person that
prepared the package that you have before you. US West is requesting permission
conditional use permit to construct a cellu-ar phone facility at the mini storage located on
Meridian. The facility would consist of interior, there is currently covered storage there.
What US West is proposing to do is to enGose one of those units with the radio equipment
inside that enclosed unit and then put the pole with the equipment next to it with the
equipment on it next to the building. This is for lack of a better term a second generation
cellular site. By that I mean the first generation of cellular is typically found on the highest
points around, for instance Table Rock and some of the 300 or 400 foot towers that they
put in. The only way that the company or any cellular company can increase capacity is
to add more sites. Given the explosive growth of the industry this is one of 4 or 5 sites that
is going to be going in around the perimeter of the Boise area, the core area to increase
capacity. From the standpoint of US West this is a fairly basic facility, there is nothing
unusual about this one that you wouldn't find in any other cellular facility. The equipment
room will contain 2 way radio equipment, and as I said the pole will have the antennas on
top. We have entered into an option to lease from the gentleman that owns the storage
pending the obtaining of all the necessary permits. We would hope that once the permits
if and when the permits are granted we would be able to move into construction as soon
as possible. It is really all we have in the way of a presentation.
Johnson: Thank you very much, are there any questions of Mr. McFadden?
Rountree: Are there any specific cellular requirements that makes this site particularly
good for you (inaudible).
McFadden: My job is I am the real estate guy that goes out and finds it and does the
permitting. The way the files are assigned to me is the engineering department based in
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 8
some areas of topography based on population, based on road or highway frontage, not
highway frontage but the availability of arterials choose a search area and it is typically a
circle or a series of circles that is drawn on a topographic map. So what they give me is
a search area map and then a specification sheet that tells me how much of a leased area
they need and how big of a pole they need. The location that we are talking about is
almost exactly in the middle of that search area. The search area is approximately a mile
across. The mini-storage is almost exactly in the middle of it. So I guess the answer to
your question is there is some room for movement but in order to obtain the coverage that
they need it has to be within that search area. Going back to my earlier point about this
being a secondary site, the biggest problem that the engineering department has in siting
these second generation sites is making sure they don't have interference from or create
interference for the sites that are already there. So siting the second generation sites is
a little bit tougher than the first one. Consequently the search areas are typically smaller.
Rountree: What would constitute interference?
McFadden: What we are basically talking about are FM signals so if you have, for instance
the facility that is over on McMillan Road northeast of here, if that facility and this facility
we are talking about would be on the same wave length operating at the same frequencies
they would intertere with each other. The way that cellular vworks, the only way it works
system wide is to be able to reuse frequencies. So what they would do if you have 4 or 5
cells let's give you an easy example, along 84, maybe every 4th cell would be using the
same frequencies and they vwould be far enough away that they wouldn't be interfering with
the 4th cell out that is using the same frequency. There are an extremely limited number
of frequencies that have been assigned by the FCC and because of the way the system
works there is only a limited number of telephone calls that one of these sites can handle.
So consequently if you need more capacity in the system that is why you need more sites.
Rountree: I think you indicated when you made your presentation that this would be one
of four sites that your company would be interested in.
McFadden: That I am aware of yes.
Rountree: In the entire Treasure Valley?
McFadden: Correct
Rountree: The critical area around this one is just one mile?
McFadden: The search area is one mile, the coverage area will go out probably 4 to 6
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 9
miles. What I am saying is 1 have a search area for here, there is another one for an area
around Eagle. There is a third one going in close to the Town mall. As I said essentially
what the first time around, what they did is went in and did the core area to get initial
coverage. What they call the coverage site. These are capacity sites, the system is over
capacity and they are trying to add more frequencies more channels to the system.
Crookston: You said there was a pole involved?
McFadden: Correct
Crookston: How tall is that?
McFadden: 100 feet steel pole, very similar to the type of the McDonald's pole. The single
steel pole that would go up that would have the antenna sitting on the top.
Hepper: Are there any other ones around the valley or would this be the first?
(Inaudible)
McFadden: The gentleman speaking is Ron Smith the real estate manager for US West,
again this kind of goes back, kind of dove tails with what I was telling you before. The
previous site, the earlier sites were all much taller, McMillan Road I think is a 200 footer,
the one on Table Rode is of course because the topography is much higher than where we
are now. The second generation poles will all be much shorter because they don't want
to interfere you keep them down low so that their coverage area is smaller and they don't
interfere with the other sites that are farther out. Most of the shorter poles are monopoles.
Once you get up higher because of the wind loading and the problems with the elements
you have to have either a self support or a guide tower which 1 am sure you have seen the
ones with the wires coming out. So it is the next generation that will be predominantly
monopoles.
Crookston: So you are saying this would not have a guide wire?
McFadden: That is correct, it will be basically just exactly like the pole that has the
McDonald's or the Kentudry Fried Chicken sign on it. It will go into the ground with no
wires.
Crookston: How bid around is the pole?
McFadden: At the base it is 48 inches.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 10
Johnson: Any other questions? Thank you very much, this is a public hearing, is there
anyone else from the public that would like to address the Commission?
Ron Smith, 15115 177th Drive NE, Woodenville, WA, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Smith: There were a couple questions addressed to our plan and why we are locating or
proposing to construct a cellular facility in the City of Meridian. I have a map here that I will
share with you. This is our growth plan map for what we consider Southern Idaho. There
are a number of sites that we are adding. I will just pass it around, it will kind of show you
where we are developing.
Johnson: Are you prepared to leave that with us because that is what happens here?
Smith: Yes, you can have it. The map is at a scale that would not be considered
proprietary information for a competitor. So if it was in public files it would not create any
problems for us. The reason we are adding additional cells is Tim explained it quite well
is that we have a site that is over on Table Rock we also have a cell site that is not too far
from here that is a guide tower. We will be lowering the height of the antennas on those
sites or turning them a different direction so that they won't be serving certain areas. So
we w911 be building a site over in Kuna, we will be building one in Meridian. They are fairly
evenly spaced. There will be also one over in the Eagle area, over off of Franklin by the
Ada County Public Safety Facility. And then there will be one in the Glenv~rood area.
These are much smaller facilities, they are typically 80 to 100 feet tall in height. This will
fill in the areas and give us additional capacity as well as allowing us to reduce the height
of these antennas that are on our existing facilities. We also added one to a bank building
in downtown Boise was a roof mount. So we are adding a number of facilities in this region
so that we could provide phone service to the customers that are requiring additional
capacity because the growth of this region has been quite phenomenal from a population
standpoint. There is quite a high demand for our services. So in order for us to meet the
demand from the customer from the public we have to have these additional facilities. In
the staff report there was one question about the location of the pole. There is a proposed
street that will be developed in the near future that will be going by the mini center. The
staff requested that if this proposal is approved that we would work with the staff to
relocated the pole. We have discussed it with the site owner and we do have the
opportunity to relocate it away from the street corridor so wa would not have to deal with
any of the potential setback issues that were addressed in the staff report. So we have
already looked into that item. This pole here will be slightly shorter than the McDonald's
pole that is presently something over 100 feet. This will be less this will be 100 feet. It will
be just a little bit shorter than a pole that is already out there.
Crookston: Are you talking about the pole that is at the Meridian McDonald's?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 11
Smith: The Meridian McDonald's I don't know if it is in the City of Meridian, the McDonald's
that is right up there. 1 am not sure where the corporate limits are. This pole will lookjust
like that with the exception that it is an evenly tapered pole versus, their pole is tapered
but it is segmented so it looks like stacked pipes, ours will be an evenly tapered one.
Crookston: How many companies are providing cellular service so that we might be able
to tell how many poles we might be looking at in the future.
Smith: Well, right now there are 2 cellular licenses in every market in the United States.
The FCC just recently issued new licenses for what they called PCS, it is a personal
communications, it is a wireless technology it would be virtually the same as cellular it just
operates at different frequencies. They have issued two licenses for every market in the
United States also. Right now there are currently 4 licenses out there, I don't know if any
of the PCS companies have started doing any work in this area yet or not. How much
demand will they have for the City of Meridian, 1 couldn't tell you. This site here will take
care of our needs for many years.
Crookston: There is no way that you can have more than one signal coming to that pole?
Smith: Well, there are a number of radio frequencies that we assign to that one
communications site because we have our radios and computers in there to receive and
transmit signals. That cell site is connected to our switch which takes care of
interconnection to whether it is coming from a wire line telephone or it is going long
distance or it is going to another cellular phone. So there is a set of frequencies that we
use there but it is limited. So, we have a site that we built in Caldwell, there we're fortunate
enough that there was an existing structure that had the correct height for us and we
mounted our antennas on a water tank that was in the proper location. There is another
one that we are doing in Nampa that is with Union Pacific they have a tower down there.
We were fortunate that there was an existing within the design search area right from the
engineering propagation models they dictate where the sites need to be when you start
adding additional sites or splitting the cells. So once you have all of these sites they all
have to kind of talk to each other just overlap slightly. But you can't use the same
frequencies where they happen to overlap or you will get static or dropped calls. Did that
answer your question?
Crookston: Pretty much, I am looking down the future. I suppose is there a possibility
there would be more than two licensed business that could have these poles in the future?
Smith: As I indicated right now there are a total of four. Our competition which is now
called AT&T Wireless on the other side of your town they have quite a large pole I don't
know, it looks to me to be around 300 feet tall. So it is outside your corporate limits. That
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 12
is a guide tower. They have a facility that will cover the Meridian area. I can't see where
they would probably be putting another one in. I can't speak for the other two companies
becuase they haven't started doing anything in this region. So it would be reasonable to
assume they might come and ask you for some type of permit whether it be attaching to
an existing structure or putting in a new pole. They may not even need to use the City or
apply or build a facility within your corporate limits.
Crookston: If they are on different frequencies is there any chance that there could be
multiple users on one pole?
Smith: Yes, and we do (inaudible) locations, that has happened. It is possible, the things
that you have to look at is the aesthetics and that is how much bulk will the pole have when
you add additional antennas to it. The other would be the design of the pole, the poles are
designed to sustain a substantial winds for safety factor. Also, once we put a facility up
on the air we want to make sure that no matter what kind of disaster occurs we would still
be able to provide phone service from an emergency stand point and for safety. The
towers have a rather rigorous design standard that they are set up for. For example in
Florida when they had the severe hurricanes there were no poles that were lost down
there. That is not our system but it is basically how the cellular companies are designed.
These poles are designed to sustain continuous winds of 140 miles an hour with the
assumption you have evenly formed radiolites over the whole tower of 1/2 inch so you get
this incredible loading. It is possible to put other people on there we just have to know
kind of in advance that we should put a stronger tower in (inaudible) for our own personal
use. The other thing they vwuld have to do is be able to make sure that the property
owner where we are at becuase we don't buy the site we put the site on a long term lease
that the property would be willing and able to accommodate an extra tenant in their facility.
I can't speak for the property owner.
Crookston: What I was looking at was we have had situations arise where people
wondered why the pole was put there, 1 am not saying (inaudible) but tall poles even radio
FM/AM type radios in their distribution system. 1 am just trying to see what is down the line
to say that there is a possiblity of combining that maybe with (inaudible) beneficial interest.
Smith: That could be something that you could add to a condition if you so desire,
hopefully you would approve our application. But that would not be an uncommon
requirement. There are other agencies that do that. We do (inaudible) locations with other
companies other businesses. For example Ada County Public Safety the project that we
are doing there is a joint venture where we build a tower and they get to use a majority of
the tower for the new communications that Ada County will be putting in for police and fire
and their court systems and they will be using that pole for that as well as we will be on.
So it will be a multi user. That is not uncommon, that happens in a number of jurisdictions.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 13
We operate in 14 states.
Crookston: You operate in the US West states, the states they operate in.
Smith: Correct, and so we probably have a couple thousand of these sites currently
operating throughout our markets. There are a number of jurisdictions that will and have
required (inaudible) location. We will accomodate the other people.
Johnson: Any other questions of Mr. Smith? Are you aware of any publications on this
subject? Would you make sure that Mr. Crookston gets on that mailing list. You wanted
to address the Commission or did you get your questions answered? Is there anyone else
that would like to address the Commission. At this time I will close the public hearing.
What would you like to do with the pole?
Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I move that have findings of fact and conclusions of law prepared
for the request for cellular communication facility.
Hepper: Second
Johnson: Moved and seconded that we have the City Attomey prepare findings of fact and
conclusions of law on the application from US West, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #14: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
FULL SERVICE RESTAURANT, LOUNGE, AND MICRO-BREWERY BY SANDPIPER
RESTAURANTS:
Johnson: At this time I will open the public hearing and ask that the representative for the
Sandpiper Restaurants come before the Commission.
Landon Exley, 1130 West Jefferson, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Exley: I am representing Sandpiper Restaurants here this evening and we are before you
to seek your aprpoval of a full service, lounge and micro-brewery located in Central Valley
Corporate Park on a portion of Lot 1, Block 6. The restaurant will be of a barn style
architecture located on a pad consisting of 1.06 acres for 46,300 square feet. The gross
square footage of the restaurant is 6,924 square feet with a total seating capacity of 228.
We 63 on site parking spaces at your ratios is 160% of required. We accept the
conditions and the submittal of the agencies as passed onto us. I would be happy to
answer any questions for you. We have Charlie Gongre of Roylance our engineer is here
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 14
and also Stan Olson of Olson and Associates our architect is here. We would request
your approval thank you.
Johnson: Thank you Mr. Exley, any questions of the applicant? Is there anyone else from
the public that would like to address the Commission on this application from the
Sandpiper Restaurants?
Sale: Mr. Chairman, we have not reviewed this application yet but it appears that our
tentative at this time our tenative recommendation is that the extension of Central Drive
not be approved. And that the restaurant take other access than as proposed by their site
plan. We will be meeting with the applicant Friday Morning to discuss this further. For the
Commissions Information that is the tentative recommendation of ACHD staff.
Johnson: As long as you are informing us of that, could you detail any reasons for not
wanting to do that?
Sale: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, it involves the design of that entire
intersection of Meridian Road, East 1st, our extension of Corporate Drive to East 1st I
mean from East 1st to Meridian and the need to de-emphasize travel or traffic at the
Central Drive intersection. I can't give you a more technical explanation than that. But it
will be included in our staff report when it is prepared by Friday.
Johnson: Thank you, any questions of Mr. Sale?
Crookston: I just have one, ACHD Commissioners will act on that Friday did you say?
Sale: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, Mr. Crookston, the Commission will act on it next
Wednesday noon. The ACHD staff will meet with the applicant this Friday morning, this
coming Friday morning.
Crookston: Thank you
Exley: We are aware of the technical meeting that took place the other day and we are
really having a major problem with this and are going to try and use all of our devices to
have ACHD help us with the entrance as it is drawn on our presentation. I would like to
have Charlie Gongre come up for one moment he has a traffic report that has been done
by the Nahas people on Central Valley Corporate Park and let him just point out a couple
of things if you please.
Gharlie Gongre, Roylance, 4619 Emerald, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 15
Gongre: The developer, Bob Nahas, has hired Bell Walker traffic engineers to do a traffic
study of the area including this intersection that we are dealing with. We will present this
to Larry Sale and Terry Little or anyone else within ACHD in order to review the aspects
and the recommendations (End of Tape) Bell Walker traffic engineers did recommend an
intersection that would bring traffic from 4 directions and not just three. We will discuss
that with ACHD at this meeting, but it has been recommended that an X type intersection
would be better than a T intersection by the engineer.
Johnson: We appreciate that information thank you. Before I close the public hearing is
there anyone else that would like to comment? Are there any questions the Commission
would like to ask?
Crookston: Mr. Chairman, I would like to have the Commissions feelings as to what they
want to do, whether or not they want to have this tabled until we have ACHD comments
and Bell Walkers comments. Or do you want to leave the record open only for those two
recommendations so that they can be included in the findings of fact. Or do you just want
to continue it until you receive them and have it and had a chance to review them.
Johnson: You are going to present them on the 20th is then when the Bell Walker study
will be done by then, you will present it then, is that correct. Oh it is done now, when will
you present it to ACHD to discuss it with them, on Wednesday the 20th?
(Inaudible)
Johnson: The meeting Friday, I thought Mr. Sale said you were going to bring that up on
the 20th.
Sale: Mr. Chairman, the staff tech review meeting will be Friday morning it would be very
advantageous to us if we had benefit of the study tomorrow so that we can review it before
our Friday meeting. The purpose of the meeting Friday vrould be to finalize staffs
recommendation to the Commission which will meet on Wednesday the 20th to render a
decision for the Highway District.
Johnson: Thank you, that clarifies my misunderstanding. And I am assuming you can make
that study available for them by tomorrow? We have several options here as a
Commission on which ever way you would like to proceed. 1 will close the public hearing
and invite you. Oh, you have something else you want to add, I have to reopen the public
hearing.
Exley: If it would help, because this is very important to us that we have a 4 way
intersection and we feel confident with this report that we have that we can convince
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 16
ACHD to do this if it will help you. I will say that we will meet all ACRD requirements and
we will leave the ball in our court to work it out so that you don't have to.
Johnson: I think that is a fair proposal. I am sure Mr. Sale has some exciting options for
you. In that regard then I will close the public hearing. We need a motion, which ever way
you would like to go on that.
Rountree: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we have findings of fact and conclusions
prepared on this with the record being opened until we are in receipt of and can include
the comments from Ada County Highway District.
Alidjani: Second
Johnson: We have a motion and a second, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #15: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR VALLEY
CENTER MARKET PLACE BY W.H. MOORE COMPANY:
Johnson: I will now open the public hearing, is Mr. Moore or the applicant's representative
here? It looks like Becky Bowcutt.
Becky Bowcutt, Briggs Engineering, 1111 South Orchard, Boise, was sworn by the City
Attorney.
Bowcutt: Good evening, this is a preliminary plat on a property located on Overland Road
adjoining 1~4 to the north. It is just west of Kuna Meridian Road. The Sandman Motel, the
new Texaco and the JB's Restaurant lies on our east boundary. To our west boundary is
the Mountain View Equipment complex. This came before this body not too long ago as
an annexation. If you recall a portion of the property was in the city limits currently zoned
C-G and a portion was outside the city limits in Ada County's jurisdiction zoned C2. We
asked for annexation so that we have a consistent zone throughout the whole property.
Mr. Moore intends to develop this property. He had kicked around multiple ideas,
commercial center, officer center. And we basically decided to proceed with the
preliminary plat, it was listed under our conditions of approval of annexation that we would
submit a preliminary plat and the development agreement would be tied to that. We are
proposing exactly 25 buildable commercial lots on approximately 39 acres .The roadway
you see there would be a private drive area. The reason that we chose a private drive, we
had some pre-application meetings with the City, some meetings with the Highway District
with the Ada County Engineer and we basically wanted some flexibility. We found in these
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 17
commercial developments that the developer end up having to go back and make
modifications and that requires vacating a public rights of ways. Therefore, by going with
this private access through here it would facilitate maximum flexibility upon our part as far
as the development is concerned. If this were to develop as a large retail center
hypothetically something like you would find over at the malt area they don't have public
streets running internally through those properties there, private access ways. However
they have to meet certain minimum standards and fire department requirements. We do
have city water, it adjoins our east boundary, it is approximately 13 feet just west of our
east boundary. That is a 10 inch main line, the City Engineer on his comment sheet has
requested that we extend that with a 12 inch and it would be extended to the west
boundary. City sewer is also available to the property, the Ten Mile interceptor is located
right at this point and it runs along the property and then goes in an easterly fashion. We
would obviously hook on to the system at this manhole and then bring the sewer services
up through the property. In Mr. Freckleton's comments we have the sewer coming down
the back basically brought it in and brought it down the bads of the lots here. His comment
was please submit a revised preliminary showing that you bring the sewer out to Overland
Road and then service these lots here versus along the rear. There are some single family
dwellings and some ag uses just south of us and that would give them the opportunity to
hook up to Central Sewer. This is the Ten Mile Creek, there is a 50 foot easement that is
along that, one of Shari's comments asked that obviously we protect the creek and make
sure that we don't encroach on that easement and come up with some type of landscaping
plan that she can take a look at to make sure that this entry way into the Ciry has some
beautification. Overland Road is also indicated I believe in your comp plan is one of the
entryway into the City. I believe Shari's comments ask fora 35 foot easement for
landscape and along the entryway. The developer's representative here this evening has
asked that basically we have the opportunity to sit down and talk with staff about the 35
feet and get more information on that on exactly what the City would like to see and see
if there would be any possibility of reducing that because that is quite large based on our
experience with other jurisdictions. 1 do not show any sidewalk on this section, we did
increase it to a 60 foot as requested by Shari, we would like to talk with staff on the
sidewalk issue since this is a commercial type development. Typically I believe Ada
County Highway District allows under certain circumstances sidewalk on one side, so we
would like to talk to the staff to see if there are any alternatives there and what their
position would be. We feel that basically this will enhance the area, it is a property that
sat vacant for many years and this is a prime opportunity to do something nice on this
parcel. It has been a weed patch too long. It will also provide new commercial services to
the Meridian area which is growing rapidly and we feel that it will be beneficial. Do you
happen to have any questions that I can answer or any comments?
Johnson: Any questions of Becky?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 18
Hepper: Yes, Becky the 6 lots there in the middle, would they all have entrances off from
Overland Road?
Bowcutt: No sir, this project has been reviewed by the Highway District or this property on
multiple occasions I did take this down to the Highway District and spoke with them about
access points. Basically due to the frontage that we had and the fact that we had two
parcels Mr. Sale wrote a letter which I can get a copy to you that stated we have a
maximum of 5 approaches. Then when it went through annexation the staff report from
Ada County Highway District indicated that they would obviously evaluate it from
development perspective on in the number of approaches. We will have four, one, two,
three, four. So basically what you would find is you can't see it from the position you are
in, there is a little curb cut here, a little curb cut here. So it would be a shared approach
so there would be a maximum of four approaches. One of the other issues was there is
a little rise in Overland Road here and the Highway District asked that we provide them
with a profile to evaluate the site distance for this. Which I did take down to them the day
before I submitted to the city and I haven't heard back on that. And basically if that requires
that we do a little shifting under their standards for sight distance than obviously we have
to comply if they have to approve and sign this plat. The other issue would be
improvements on Overland Road. This particular development if you recall the Highway
District asked that we trust fund for the sidewalk in this area. But the City asked that we
construct it, we kind of got into a catch 22 situation where iwo entities wanted two different
things. We found out the same thing on Kuna Meridian Road. We ended up finding a
compromise there. We worked with Ada County Highway District to design this to match
their future design that would come through this intersection from the east of Overland
Road when they improve it. And then to basically satisfy Idaho Department of
Transportation we meandered the sidewalk off of the right of way on private property
because they didn't want it there due to the drainage problems it would create they have
no central storm drainage system. Right now Overland Road through here is just barrow
ditch. So probably worst case scenario would be pavement widening and going through
and creating a turn lane and so forth. I would like to refresh your memory to the fact that
this property can't be developed without a conditional use because it is in that planned
development overlay zone. Shari stated that on her last comment, I talked to Dave
Schplitz of Ada County Highway District and basically he agreed with me to do a traffic
study at this time would be premature where we don't have a specific use. We would be
just guessing what would happen here. Since we can't do anything on here without a
conditional use it was agreed that a traffic study would have to be accomplished prior to
any use. At that time then they would have to evaluate if signals were required and so forth
and look at the loads.
Hepper: So did you say they were going to put sidewalks along Overland or are you going
to trust fund it?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 19
Bowcutt: We will have to wait and see how it pans out.
Hepper: You are not sure yet?
Bowcutt: Exactly.
Hepper: What about a fence along the entryway there did I see a notation about a block
fence or block wall or something?
Bowcutt: No, that is an existing, there is a wall in there, that is for the Kennedy Lateral.
Kennedy Lateral crosses the road here and then runs along this southwest portion. We will
have to move that out of the public right of way and under the City's requirements it will be
piped. I spoke with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and they estimate it will take a 36
inch pipe and so we will have to submit a design to them and take it out of the right of way
and then run it to this boundary.
Hepper: So would there be any fencing or berming along Overland Road?
Bowcutt: I think Shari's comment was we would have to submit a landscaping plan for the
City's review showing the landscaping. Her requirements say there will be 35 feet worth
of landscaping adjoining Overland Roads. So as it stands now yes we have to have 35
feet of landscaping.
Hepper: You don't have any proposals for any type of fence then?
Bowcutt: No sir not to my knowledge.
Rountree: With the resolution of the landscaping issue, will that be provided by the
developer or by each individual owner, lot owner?
Bowcutt: Typically when you find along the entrance road that is usually the responsibility
of the developer, but I wouldn't want to make a commitment on his part. When they
develop individually you usually have your minimum standards based on minimum square
footage on how much area of yours has to be landscaped as compared to your asphalt.
So potentially it could be done in a piece meal fashion or some, or you can look at some
type of an umbrella standard for the whole development. The developer could evaluate
that and potentially submit something to the City to make sure that he had a consistent
type of landscaping on all lots that met the city standards. Potentially Jonathan can
answer that question. I think (inaudible) conditional use comes in at that time this body
would have the opportunity to set standards for landscaping.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 20
Johnson: I am sure from the perspective of the City we would encourage a one time
landscape plan there as opposed to individual tenants or owners, piece mealing the entry
way to our City. Any other questions? Anyone else from the public like to address the
Commission on this application?
William Miha, 795 West Overland Road, was swrorn by the City Attorney.
Miha: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, being a homeowner for two years and
having retired from the United States Coast Guard I live on the corner of Overland and
Stoddard. That would be the last lot there. My concern is for the children that live not only
in my house but up and down that road. I have seven children myself, I know of at least
25 on that block and there are probably closer to 30 on that block. The speed limit
presently on that street starts at 35 miles per hour by the time it gets to my house it is 45.
Since moving in there 2 years ago I have lost two dogs that my children have endeared
to themselves. My concern is for the children, some of mine have already run across the
street just to get a can of pop at the pop machine over at the Intermountain Equipment
place. If that mall goes in my concern is there are going to be children running across that
street constantly. It is a very valid concern I have, I have older children and I have younger
siblings who tend to run after their older brothers and sisters. My second concern is in
regards to possible assessment for myself in regards to city water, city sewer. If I was
forced into a position where I had no option there and 1 had to take a loan out to meet
those assessment needs. Presently I am going through a retraining program after 20
years in the United States Coast Guard and I am sufficiently in debt (inaudible) sell the first
home I have had in a long time and relocate. But there is a lot of factors that are involved.
My primary concern again is safety of the children that live in that area. All accept my place
I own my place the rest of those places are all rentals. (Inaudible) that is my concern at
the present time.
Johnson: We appreciate your testimony, any questions? Thank you, is there anyone else
that would like to address the Commission? Is there anybody from staff that has a
comment? I have a question of Shan Stiles. Directly to the east what was the requirement
imposed on the commercial development there with respect to the setback, was it 35 and
would we stick by our 35?
Stiles: You are referring to the Sandman?
Johnson: I try not to but I will since they are listed on the map.
Stiles: I believe they ended with about 20 feet but that property was previously annexed
to the City. The property directly kitty comer from that has a requirement for 35 foot
landscape setback on Meridian Road and Overland Road.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 21
Johnson: And around the corner and going north did they stick to the 35 there or was that
also part of the previously annexed and we didn't impose the 35 stringently.
Stiles: That was also previously annexed and developed prior to the 35 foot landscape
setback requirement.
Johnson: I don't know what they did for a setback there which eventually wound up with
I don't recall, 20, 35?
Stiles: I believe it was about 20, a lot of that was already a sanitary sewer easement which
they weren't allow to plant anything in. But we ended up, I wouldn't be particularly excited
about what was done there but that is what happened.
Johnson: What lies direct to the south of this project?
Stiles: Residential subdivision, it is pretty much agricultural.
Johnson: I am trying to picture it, I know where it is of course. By the way you need to
leave that presentation you gave us. Where is Stoddard, I guess that is what I am looking
for?
Stiles: would you like me to point it out on the zoning map?
Johnson: It is not on this map I don't think, sure I would like you to point it out to me. So
it is just slightly to west of the project right?
(Inaudible)
Johnson: And the property is contiguous to Mountain View's property, that is a question
to Becky, it is. Thank you, any other questions or comments? Anyone else have a closing
comment? Does ACHD have anything they want to offer?
Sale: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission, I wasn't because Ms. Bowcutt so
eloquently spoke of all the little problems that existed and could be resolved with little
adjustments of this map. There may in fact be a significant problem with sight distance
and that with regard to the location of the two street intersections and the driveways and
they may have to change the grade of Overland Road somewhat which may or may not be
a little solution. Beyond that we don't have any serious objections at this time.
Johnson: As I understand it do you haven't actually put this through the Commission yet
is that true?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 22
Sale: Mr. Chairman that is correct this is on the same schedule it will be before or tech
review meeting this Friday morning and go to the Commission next Wednesday.
Johnson: Thank you. Dces anyone else have anything? I will close the public hearing at
this time. Any discussion, what would you like to do?
Rountree: I would like to see the plat modified to show your common lot for landscaping
or have notes on the plat that would indicate how landscaping is going to accomplished
and where. And I would like to see it reflect a final approved access points on Overland
before I would make a recommendation to the City.
Johnson: Does anyone else have any comments? Would anyone like to make a motion?
Rountree: I guess in that situation we table it until it is done. Mr. Chairman, I make a
motion that we table action on the preliminary plat for this item until we get resolve of the
issues pointed out this evening here.
Crookston: Do you want to leave the public hearing open or closed or an opportunity to
re-open without further notice.
Rountree: I will further expand that to leave the opportunity to re-open the public hearing
without further notice if deemed necessary by the Commission to the next regularly
scheduled meeting.
Hepper: Second
Johnson: We have a motion and a second to table this item and with the condition that the
public hearing can be reopened if we deem it necessary, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM SQUARE
FOOTAGE FROM 1800 TO 1500 SQUARE FEET FOR ENGLEWOOD SUBDIVISION BY
ENGLEWOOD CREEK DEVELOPMENT:
Johnson: I will now open the public hearing is the applicant or representative here that
would like to address the Commission at this time?
Richard Jewell, 1082 Arlington, Eagle, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jewell: Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, first of all I would like to apologize for getting
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 23
here late and I appreciate you holding it over. This request is for reduction in square
footage of the dwellings for Englewood Subdivision from 1800 square feet to 1500 square
feet. There are several reasons that we are requesting this. One of the major reasons
those is due to the current market. The 1800 square foot homes are not really selling at
this time, they have not been for the past year.
Johnson: Enlighten me, what is the average sale price on an 1800 square foot home?
Jewell: They range approximately between well right around $75 a square foot.
Smith: $135,000
Jewell: We have another subdivision Running Brook Estates which had the minimum
square footage of 1800 square feet, it is a different location or different area. However we
have had some hardships in that particular subdivision because of the lack of lot sales.
In addition to that the surrounding subdivisions that have been approved and are in the
process of being developed are all in the neighborhood of 1400 square feet. Originally we
came to the City I guess it dates back to about April requesting the square footage
reduction. There was some concern about how to proceed with this. So we decided to
come back to Planning and Zoning as per the MayoPs recommendation. Do you have any
questions?
Johnson: Yes, why does the Mayor keep doing this?
Jewell: Well in this particular case he was probably correct, the reason being is because
in the preliminary plat process when we had the preliminary plat submitted along with the
annexation request the City requested the preliminary covenants of which we submitted
and they were generally what we intended however they were sketched from the last
project we had at 1800 square feet and that is how it got sent through and the annexation
tied the square footage of the dwelling units to the approval or the approval tied the square
footage to the annexation which I believe is an incorrect thing but apparently that is how
it's done.
Johnson: The difference between that market, that $112,500 versus $135,000 I have no
clue whether that is a valid argument or not. I don't have any statistics on what is selling
and what isn't. What you are telling us is there is a significant difference just to that 300
square foot range then as far as what people are able to afford at this point or that is what
is selling.
Jewell: Generally in the valley here, anything that is say up to $105,000 - $110,000 it is
selling as fast as you can put them up generally speaking. You get up to $125,000 -
• !
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 24
$150,000 on up to $250,000 somewhere in there and it is a very depressed market at least
compared to what it was.
Johnson: I knowthe upper market in the $200,000 to $250,000 range is really depressed
but I wasn't aware it was at $135,000. Thank you very much, are there any other, any
questions at all for Mr. Jewell? Thank you, this is a public hearing, does anyone else have
any comments? Dces anyone from staff have any comments on the reduction request in
square footage of these homes? At this point I will close this public hearing. Is there any
discussion, if not I wilt entertain a motion for whatever you would like to do.
Aiidjani: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we have the City Attorney draw up findings.
Rountree: Second
Johnson: I assume we need findings on this request for a reduction, is that correct or not?
Crookston: Well, there were findings prepared when we did the annexation and zoning.
The findings indicate that the request for the 1800 square feet was at the developers
request as I remember it was included in their application either in their plat application or
in their annexation application. I think that you do need to amend, if your desire is to
proceed with the amendment I think that those findings need to be amended. I don't think
we need new findings but you would need amended findings.
Johnson: That was the reason for my question. So we do have a motion and a second.
Crookston: You can make a recommendation you still need the findings but you can make
a recommendation.
Johnson: I was thinking, I am trying to find a way to speed this process up is what I trying
to do.
Crookston: It would still have to approve the amended findings.
Alidjani: So no matter what we do it is going to wait until the October 10th meeting in order
to approve the amended findings or a new finding.
Crookston: That is correct.
Alidjani: Because how can any of us amend findings which we don't have the copy of right
now anyway?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 25
Johnson: Isn't there a way we can proceed since we are only changing the square
footage?
Crookston: I think that you can make a finding that would amend the previously adopted
findings down to the 1500 that I would prepare those findings and that can proceed onto
the Council.
Johnson: If that is legal that would be my recommendation that we do that so we are
moving this thing along a little quicker. But on that motion we have on the floor then we
either need it withdrawn then or vote on it.
Alidjani: Mr. Chairman I take back my motion.
Johnson: The motion has been withdrawn then, is there a new motion?
Crookston: You either need to approve or deny the change and then request that findings
be prepared to reflect your decision.
Hepper: So moved
Johnson: We have a motion then to approve the request of the reduction of the square
footage, do we have a second?
Rountree: Second
Johnson: All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Johnson: Is there an additional foot note?
Hepper: I really don't see where it is a problem where there is not going to be any
additional findings.
Johnson: There is no additional testimony, there isn't anything else to add. Is there
anything else anyone would like to bring up?
Rountree: Do we want to talk about that letter from Gary Smith that was in our mailbox,
has that been resolved?
Johnson: I think I responded to your letter once and if that is the one Charlie is referring
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 26
to, is that the letter you are referring to?
Rountree: The one about building going on without subdivision developers completing
their (inaudible).
Johnson: And I gave a written response to that, didn't you get my response? I gave it to
the City Clerk and he has someone that makes copies for him all day long I don't know why
he didn't do that. Anyway would you like to talk about that? I was just concurring my own
personal opinion that agreeing with Gary on that.
Rountree: Do we take action as a Commission to support that?
Johnson: I believe he solicited everybody from A to Z including the Planning and Zoning
did you not?
Smith: Yes I did.
Hepper: Gary, don't the developers have to finish everything before the building permits
are issued?
Smith: No
Hepper: I was under the impression everything had to be finished before you would sign
off.
Johnson: It doesn't work that way.
Smith: Right now the policy is that once the plat is recorded and there is an all weather
road installed that would support fire truck and emergency vehicles then building permits
are being issued. That is a gravel roadway it does not include street signs, well we are
requesting the street signs now be installed now prior to building permits and street lights
because of the security problems and because of emergency personnel and our building
department personnel not being able to find the dv~lling when they are requested to do
an inspection. So we are requiring those two things plus the all weather road. But that is
all that is being required at this point in order for a building permit to be issued.
Hepper: In order for a plat to be recorded doesn't the project either have to be finished or
bonded?
Smith: It does not have to be finished, it has to be bonded so that all the improvements are
guaranteed to be finished.
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 27
Hepper: Doesn't the bonding pretty much meet
Smith: It is a timing, the problem Tim is a timing situation.
Hepper: You have a bond that that stuff will be done but the question is when will it ever
get done.
Smith: Right and us having to bird dog it during the process of building going on out there
people moving in, wanting final occupancy permits, still off site improvements as I call them
not being completed such as fencing and landscaping.
Alidjani: Gary, didn't they have that problem at Parkside Creek (inaudible) Waterbury one
of them was (inaudible) mud on the ground. I remember something at Parkside Creek.
(Inaudible)
Smith: Yes you are right Parkside Creek was a real problem because there was a terrific
amount of mud that was taken out of the subdivision by the vehicles. In fact they were
having to pull lumber trucks into and out of the subdivision because they didn't have, that
was probably preceded our requirements for an all weather road. That is when that all
weather roadway requirement began.
Johnson: Yes, right after that is when required that.
Smith: I can point you towards a subdivision if you would like to go look at it and that is
Bedford Place. Bedford Place has had its problems but throughout the length of all the
problems what they have been able to do is basically get all the improvements in, we have
restricted building permits for various reasons but during that period of time they have
been able to put most all of the improvements in. Street signs are up, roads are paved,
temporary street signs, boundary debris catching fence is up, their berm is built, it is not
landscaped along Ustick but it is built, the sidewalk is built out there. They have one other
problem that has to be overcome yet for the subdivision. If you go look at it in its entirety
it is a very buildable subdivision from the standpoint of access, from the standpoint of
knowing where you are when you are in the subdivision. From the standpoint of emergency
vehicles being able to get into it and do their, be able to fulfill their requirement if needed
if they are called upon. I know the development community wants to be able to get into a
subdivision and get started selling lots, building homes as soon as possible and I can
understand that. Our problem in the Public Works and Building Department and Shari's
problem is being able to police the requirements of the development agreement, but sure
that these things get done. Some cases they are not done intentionally I think. In other
cases they don't get done because everyone is so busy, the developer is so busy.
i ~
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 28
Hepper: Could there be a way Gary of putting weather clauses in there of some sort so
that if the berm isn't completed due to its the middle of the winter or something like that
that they wouldn't be shut down until Spring until the berm was completed or something?
I think when you have a blanket policy everything has to be finished before you can start
building and some things can't be finished in the middle of the winter even when all the
street lights are up and the street signs but I think maybe a weather clause of some sort
in there.
Smith: Well, that certainly can be considered. The problems that we endure as your staff
is that those things that are not done by the developer ultimately come back and rest on
our shoulders and we are the bad guys because we are forcing someone a property owner
a resident someone who has purchased a home they are having to tow the mark because
of something the developer (End of Tape)
Hepper: (Inaudible) didn't create the problem in the first place.
Smith: They didn't create the problem, the developer created the problem, the
homeowners inherited it and they may have done something on their lot that is causing
them some great distress and they are at the City of Meridian's throat because of what we
are requiring the developer to do. And case in point is Salmon Rapids and their fence
along Locust Grove Road. The last Council meeting was a prime example of the
developer doing something he shouldn't have done, the City not catching him when he did
it until after the fact and then the City requiring them to do what they said they were
supposed to do and what was required to do and the homeowners unloading on the City.
We had a half a dozen homeowners in the Council chambers that night complaining about
that.
Alidjani: (Inaudible) having a percentage of the lots in any subdivision, I think one time
that we talked about that. Let's say we were talking about, if the subdivision had 200 lots
if they get 10% of those lots get their building permits for the 10°k then they should have
done so much of the work. And after so many percentage of the lots are built then so much
of the work has to be done. Is there a way you can have (inaudible) what is important to
you and what is not according to the number of the building permits for the percentage of
the lots being sold and built? Do you (inaudible)
Smith: In order to do something like that Moe we just have to add staff to keep track of it.
we are really operating on a pretty skeletal staff situation. We try to keep track, if we have
to keep track of all these little caveats it is just going to mean that much more of a chance
that something is going to fall through the crack and we are not going to be able to we are
not going to see it and we are not going to catch it. It is just much simpler for everybody
involved if the development is a complete, at least complete to the point that perhaps as
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 29
Tim said weather won't allow something to be completed. But that it is an extenuating
circumstance. That would just have to be looked at on a case by case basis.
Johnson: I don't know how you tie that to the weather though because that is exactly the
problem you are trying to avoid. It could be weather related in every case where you can't
get the emergency vehicle in there because something has to be done. So I don't know,
you maybe can tie that to a berm or something as opposed to a road. I don't know how you
can just like at least say because of winter, we have winter, (inaudible) everything would
be exempted. I guess you would have to make a list of the essentials and nonessentials
and then who would police that?
Smith: And the winter time is always problem time because developments are trying to get
their roads in, get the roads paved while the asphalt plans are still in operation. They need
to do that so they can have some lots during the winter that they can close on or the
occupancy permits can be released. Until the roads are paved we can't final a sewer, we
can't final the water system, ACHD won't final the streets obviously. So paving of the
streets is a pretty important thing. Typically in this country you are pushing your luck if you
are getting in very far into November and trying to pave.
Rountree: Well, on a final plat doesn't everything in terms of infrastructure show up?
Smith: No, the only thing that shows up on a final plat is the road right of way and the lots,
the lot arrangements.
Rountree: Notes and so forth on the plat don't indicate what lots will have what were and
when?
Smith: The notes will indicate those lots that are common area lots that would be owned
and maintained by the Homeowners Association. It may, notes would indicate easements,
sewer easements, water easements, other utility easements that are outside of the right
of way. But the actual plans for the development of the subdivision are not part of the final
plat. Those plans are what we call development plans and there is a typically a set for the
street construction and a set for the utilities, namely the sewer and the water. Street
construction will show street lights and curb and gutter and sidewalk, pavement.
Rountree: Do you have those before you issue building permits?
Smith: Yes
Rountree: and if there is something on one of those lots on your building plans that hasn't
been done can you deny a building permit until it is done. That is the easiest way to police
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 30
it.
Smith: That would be getting back to having the subdivision done, if I am following your
line of questioning.
Rountree: Well, they may not have all the streets in.
Smith: Once they start the streets, they put in curb and gutter and sidewalk once they get
the gravel base in. Then they pave it out so the streets are basically done in one swoop
for one phase. If a final plat is approved by Council there is a chance or there is an
opportunity for the developer to have anon-development agreement on a portion of that
plat if it is approved by the Council. So they wouldn't install the improvements for the
recorded plat. They would only install improvements for that portion outside of the non-
development agreement. And some developers will do that for economic reasons if they
plat a large number of lots they will come back and only develop improvements for a lesser
number. But typically those street improvements all, that happens pretty fast.
Rountree: But not every lot in every subdivision has some of the things that cause the
problems like lack of street signs and lack of street lights which would show on your
development plans. If they aren't there on those particular lots when somebody requested
building permits for that lot it not be issued until that street sign is put in on that lot or that
street light is put in on that comer lot or that portion of the landscaping or fencing that is
part of the development, if that is in your development plan and not done then they don't
get a building permit for that lot. Now if it is a lot that all you need is curb, gutter, and
sidewalk, power and sewer and water no problem.
Smith: I understand what you are saying, however, the absence of the street lights, the
absence of the street sign is impacting all of the lots, Without those things they, we're
missing a big piece of being able to service the subdivision.
Rountree: Then you have to look at life and safety issues, those things need to be in no
matter what.
Alidjani: And also the problem is I will buy the lot and you buy from me and Tim is going
to start building. I am the developer and you are not the developer (inaudible) Tim has
already done all of his what he can do trying to get a building permit but I am the one
actually with the (inaudible) didn't do what I am supposed to do.
Smith: That is what it boils down to is we go from having to deal with the developer to
having to deal with 4 people, where we have a developer, a realtor, a builder and a
homeowner involved in it. They are all beating on us for one reason or another trying to
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 31
get their occupancy permit and something isn't done. I know this isn't a very palatable
requirement for the development community, however, I am beginning to think that maybe
it wouldn't be, that maybe it would be more acceptable than I even think it would be with
them. It is going to create better on the part to get things done in an order that they can
live with and still market their lots. They have a lot of money laying out there with their
infrastructure, with their improvements. The only way they can recover that is through the
sale of lots. So, I don't think it is going to be an easy situation to, as far as the
development community is concerned.
Hepper: I would like to hear a couple of comments from some area developers, not being
a developer I don't know. 1 know the image of Meridian here in the last couple of years has
changed from being the soft touch to going the other way. That everyone is starting
(inaudible) really being a bunch of hard noses. I hate to get,
Rountree: That is not what your dad said is it?
Hepper: No, I talked to some other developers and they have problems getting other things
through an I had to just add another hurdle to them. But then again I can see your point
too. It seems like there would be some non-significant things like shrubs or something. I
would had to see a subdivision shut down for 6 months in the winter because they didn't
get a couple of shrubs in and they can't get them in because the
Johnson: I still think you have your variance option on things like that wouldn't you? Where
they can come to the City Council and proceed get a variance because of something like
the landscaping wasn't completed or something like that.
Smith: We have issued water meters for example to homes that have homeowners that
need to move in need to occupy because of one reason or another they are basically out
in the street without that occupancy. We put those meters in with realization that the water
system wasn't finaled yet from a water quality standard it is fine but all of the improvements
have not been completed but we have put those meters in knowing that they will complete
the subdivision, they will finish the water system, final it out and they always have. But
they understand too that if they don't follow through they aren't going to get any more
water meters. So our water meter is a big hammer.
Hepper: I think if you are willing to work on it on an individual basis, let them go to a
certain point and then say that is it that is as far we go until you are finished.
Johnson: I think the City has been fortunate up to this point. And particularly when our
image was different among the development community that we haven't had any serious
liability suits or threats or losses as a result of not tending the business enough in that
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 32
area. So, from my perspective I think in the best interest of the City of Meridian that we
need to get a little tougher, maybe tougher is not the right word but at least have a more
clear cut avenue and rules on this sort of thing. We just don't have the staff to run out and
see that every little thing that they say they are going to do is being done. With the Cap
on the budget with the legislature we are not going to be to do that for a long time. The
funds aren't going to be there.
Hepper: Do you have a final sign off or a final walk through on a subdivision before you
sign it off that it is totally done?
Smith: Yes, well we do on the water and the sewer definitely, those are signed off. Lately
we have been, I don't know if we have a regular punch list but I have been talking to Shari
about the subdivisions that have development agreements and they have an attachment
that is part of the development agreement that lists by item things that have to be
completed. And so between Shari and Cheryl Sable in my office those items are going to
be checked off.
Johnson: And that is a relatively new procedure that we have within the last year or so
right?
Smith: Right, but it is just, I guess, all of the rules that we endure in our society are the
result of someone not playing by the rules. And the more violations or infractions that
occur the more rules are generated. I hate that because it just becomes so cumbersome
you can't do business it is so difficult. On the one hand, on the other hand you have a half
a dozen homeowners screaming at you over the phone and Shari has one now on a
business on the north end of Meridian Road that is in violation by several years of not
doing what they said they were going to do. The people that are frequenting the business
are calling now upset at the City of Meridian because of what the guy that owns the
building did not do. But it is a matter of having enough time having enough people to
follow the requirements through and make sure that they are being done and completed
so we don't have to go back and do this sort of thing in order to get something done.
Maybe it is going to take longer I don't know. But anyway that is just of my request for your
comments.
Johnson: Does anybody have anything else? If not I will entertain a motion to adjourn.
Rountree: So moved
Hepper: Second
Johnson: All those in favor? Opposed?
Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission
September 12, 1995
Page 33
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 9:18 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
~~
JIM JO NS C RMAN
ATTEST:
~-- ~, -L<
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., C RK